Download Windshield survey and reflection and more Study notes Survey Sampling Techniques in PDF only on Docsity!
Windshield Surveys of Highway Condition:
A Feasible Input to Pavement Management
DAVID T. HARTGEN AND JOHN J. SHUFON
The procedure used by the New York State Department of Transporta- tion to collect highway condition data by using an in-motion windshield survey is described. The windshield survey is performed by road rating teams from the department's regional offices. Cost is about $50,000 for the 16,000-mile system or about $3.12/mile. Rating is done with care- fully developed photograph scales in which photographs show not specific distress signals but rather general impressions of roads at various condition levels. Periodic training ensures consistency in assessing highway condition, and this decentralized approach permits a rapid data collection effort at a low cost to the agency. Also presented are the many uses of these data in the state's pavement management activity, both as a network-level condition-assessment process and as a screening process to identify sections of highway that require further engineering analysis. The conclusion is that windshield surveys conducted in accor- dance with the outlined rating methods can provide pavement managers with a current and reliable assessment of network-level highway condi- tion and point to possible problem sections that require more detailed analysis. Low costs, speed of delivery of data, and avoidance of expen- sive measuring devices are also significant advantages of the method.
The purpose of pavement management is to protect the capital investment in the highway system and to en- sure maximum serviceability to the motoring public at reasonable cost. Pavement management involves planning, design, construction, maintenance, and periodic evaluation of pavement structures. The pavement management process involves comparison of investment alternatives at both the network and project levels, coordination of the various activi- ties of the highway agency, and the efficient use of existing information and methodology. The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) is taking a number of steps to improve its pavement management practices. A pavement manage- ment task force is reviewing department practices and procedures in pavement evaluation as well as the
Figure 1. Overview of New York State highway condition data.
llom
Total Syst1m - Surface Condition
- Highway - Base Condition Condition Survey
P1rtlal Syslem - PRI
- PRI Survey Samples
- HPMS (1 ,800 seclions")
- PSR Raling
- Continuous Counlers (59 seclions)
- Hy Condition Scores
- Albany Co ~ Delerioralion Study ( 121 seclions)
- PRI
- BPR Roughomeler
- Crack/Palch indices
- Highway Condilion Scores
- Slale Syslem Only a Focus ol this paper
59
x
x
60 61 62 63 64 65 66
x x x x x
x x x x x
67 68 69
x x
x x
information needed for sound management. Methods are also being developed to predict network-level condition and funding needs for alternative rehabil- itation strategies. Considerable work has also been undertaken to improve and streamline various condi- tion rating procedures. This paper reviews progress in this last subject: another paper (.!,) describes the condition prediction model. The purpose of this paper is to describe New York's current windshield condition survey, "the various uses of the data, and. the improvements that were made to the scoring pro- cedures for the 1981 and 1982 effort.
OVERVIEW OF CONDITION SURVEY METHODS
Reliable, current highway condition data are vital to sound pavement management ( 2-7) • These data are used to establish priorities fo°"i capital construc- tion and maintenance, to decide on treatments for roads in need of attention, and to project pavement performance over time (4). The amount and type of data collected for pave- ment management depend primarily on the intended uses of data in the management process. Pavement condition is often assessed by analyzing data on surface condition, structural adequacy, roughness, and skid resistance. Clearly, the collection and processing of these data for each highway link on an annual basis would be ideal. This is not possible on large (16,000 miles) highway systems like New York State's without a large expenditure. Lack of available funds and staff for full detailed surveys, along with the relatively slow rate of change for many of these items, suggests that collection of full data on all sections is neither efficient nor necessary.
YEAR 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82
x x x x x x^ x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x
x x
x x x
x x x
x x x
x
Figure 2. Photographic scales of pavement condition.
Note: K Is u se d lo repr ese nt 10.
Sampling procedures are one alternative to the more expensive mass-inventory method of data collec- tion (4,5,8,9). Detailed data that require intri- cate measurement could be collected on the sample sections on a regular basis. A small number of sam- ples carefully monitored over time could provide the analyst with all the information necessary for de- veloping performance curves, · determining service lives of various rehabilitation actions, and evalu- ating current construction practices. Expansion of the sample data to the entire highway system could also provide network-level estimates of condition and cost information. The federal government has recently adopted this approach in its Highway Per- formance Monitoring Sytem (10), which will track a sample of highway sections over time. Sampling strategies, however, are not without problems. Ex- treme care must be applied to the design of the sampling process to balance the cost of collecting the data and the information gained from the survey
3 4
12>. Every sample survey contains sampling errors, thus results are not known with certainty. And,. although sampling strategies can provide valuable input to the pavement management process, they can- not (because they are sample-based) provide the in- formation necessary for project selection and pri- ority ordering. Another method used in the collection of condi- tion data is known as a partial survey. A partial survey occurs where a preliminary visual examination of the highway system is made and is used to iden- tify highway segments that require additional, more detailed information (8). This approach combines the best elements of- the complete inventory (a census of all sections) but does not collect unnec- essary detail for sections in good condition. De- tailed data, comparable to those collected in sample approaches, may then be collected on selected sec- tions to determine the exact nature of the prob-
.&. -
5
scales. Data processing procedures were also re- vised, and the results were furnished to the regions 2 to 3 weeks after receipt. Uses of the data in- clude project selection, network summaries for the governor's message on transportation and capital plant renewal (12) • and projection of condition under various repair strategies.
DEVELOPMENT OF CONDITION SCALES
The goal of the windshield condition survey is to provide preliminary data indicative of overall con- dition. The data must be
- Consistent between regions or highway types,
- Rapidly collectable,
- Repeatable over time,
- Reasonably accurate but not overly precise,
- Easily understandable by lay persons,
- Inexpensive to collect, and
- Consistent with existing procedures.
The procedure developed by NYSDOT to achieve these objectives involves the use of visual and verbal scales designed to standardize the scoring process. Two separate scales have been developed:
- Surface condition: resents the condition of
- Base condition: fleets problems with the
Visual Scales
A 1 to 10 scale that rep- the pavement surface and A 1 to 10 scale that re- underlying base.
In early 1981 NYSDOT developed a set of visual scales to be used by regional staff in conducting the highway condition survey. These scales were de- veloped through a modification of a ~sychological perception measurement technique known as Q-sort. Basically, this method involves a small numbei:: of experts (judges) who sort or rate a large number of photographs that show highways in various stages of condition. Eight pavement experts from various of- fices within the department ranked each of 50 photo- graphs on a 1 to 10 scal'e once for the pavement surface and once for the base (rupture and displace-
Table 1. Verbal rating scales for pavement surface.
ment) condition. Those photographs that have the least variance in scores among the judges were se- lected for the photographic scales and assembled to form the actual visual scales for surface and base. Slight refinements were made to the visual scales before the 1982 field scoring effort. Additional photographs were added to the midrange of 4 to 8, a er i tical area where investment decisions are often made, and the scales were stratified by pavement type. The refined scales were reproduced and in- cluded in the field scoring manual used by the re- gional survey teams. These scales are shown in Fig- ure 2. Note that these photographs represent actual scale values. They are not used to portray various examples of distress signals. Details of the Q-sort procedure, including statistical validation, are described in detail in another paper (13). The use of photographs for describing the various distress signals and defining frequency and severity measures is a well-known and extensively used procedure (4,8,14) i the use of photographs as scale points in e;aluation of pavements has not been tried, at least to our knowledge.
Verbal Scales
Before 1981 verbal scales formed the basis of NYSDOT's highway condition surveys. These scales were also revised in 1981 and 1982 for use with the visual scales. The pavement management task force determined the types of distress most common to New York State pavements. The task force defined the distress signals for ·rigid (portland cement con- crete), flexible (asphalt concrete), and composite (asphalt surface course overlaid on concrete slabs) pavements. Once the types of distress were deter- mined, verbal scales were reviewed for the surface and base (rupture and displacement) for each type of pavement according to the frequency and severity of distress. Photographs of each distress signal for both surface and base (not the scale photographs de- termined earlier) and the frequency and 5everity er iter ia to be used when scoring were included in the field scoring manual Ill> supplied to the re- gional survey teams. The verbal scales are given in Tables 1 and 2.
Rigid Pavements Flexible Pavements Overlay Pavements General Frequency Score Condition of Distress Distress Severity^ Distress Severity^ Distress^ Severity
10• Excellent No distress, recently No distress, recently con- No distress, recently overlaid constructed or re- structed or reconstructed constructed 9 Excellent No distress, joints No^ distress, recen^ Uy^ re-^ No^ distress,^ hairline^ retlCction functioning properly surfaced cracking may exist 8 Good Infrequent Joint spalling, cracking, Very slight Raveling, cracking, and Very slight Reflection cracking Very^ slight and scaling wheel track wear 7 Good lnfreq uent to Joint spalling, cracking, Slight Raveling, cracking, and Slight Reflection cracking, multiple Slight occasional and scaling wheel track wear cracking at reflection cracks 6 Fair^ Infrequent^ to^ Joint^ spalling, cracking,^ Moderate^ Raveling,^ cracking,^ rutting,^ Moderate^ Multiple^ cracking, raveling^ Slight^ to occasional scaling and patching and^ patching^ may exist^ along cracks moderate may exist Poor Occasional to Joint spalling, cracking, Moderate to Raveling, cracking, rutting, Moderate to Multiple cracking, raveling Moderate to frequent Scaling, and patching severe and patching may exist severe along cracks · severe may exist 4 Poor^ Occasional to Joint^ spalling, cracking,^ Severe^ Raveling, cracking,^ rutting,^ Severe^ Surface^ delamination^ Severe frequent (^) scaling, and patching and patching may exist may exist Poor Frequent Joint spalling, cracking, Severe Raveling, cracking, rutting, Severe Surface delamination Severe scaling, and patching and^ patching^ may exist may exist 2 Poor Extremely deteriorated, Extremely deteriorated, Extremely deteriorated, motorist discomfort, motorist discomfort, and motorist discomfort, and and travel difficult travel difficult travel difficult Poor Impassable at posted Impassable at posted speed Impassable at posted speed speed
(^3) Coded K in Figure 2,
Table 2. Verbal rating scales for base.
Rigid Pavements Flexible^ Pavements^ Overlay^ Pavements
General Frequency^ of
Score Condition Distress Distress Severity Distress Severity^ Distress^ Severity
10• Excellent No distress caused by No distress caused by un- No distress caused by move- underlying roadbed derlying roadbed move- ment or deterioration of the movement, recently ment, recently con- underlying portland cement constructed or re- structed or reconstructed con crete slab constructed 9 Excellent No distress caused by No dis tre ss caused by un- und erlying roadb ed derlying roadbed m ove- movement ment 8 Good Infrequent Slab displacement, Very sligltt Longitudinal cracking in Very sligltt Non-joint-related reflection Very sligltt pumping with re- wlteelpatlts cracking sultant fines Good Infrequent to (^) Pumping, faulting, and Sligltt Wlteelpat It rutting, multiple S!igltt Non-joint-related reflection Sligltt occasional base-related cracking wlteelpatlt cracks cracking, surFace distortion (longitudinal, diagonal, corner) 6 Fair Infrequent to Pumping, faulting , and Moderate Wlteelpatlt rutting , alligat or Moderate Non-joint-related reflection Moderate Occasional base-related cracking cracking c racking, surface distortion (faulting) Poor Occasional to Pumping, faulting, and Moderate to Wlteelpatlt rutting, alligator Moderate Non-joint-related re flection Moderate to Frequent base-re lated cracking severe (^) cracking cracking, surface distortion severe (faulting) 4 Poor Occasional to Pumping, faulting, and Severe Wlteelpatlt rutting, alligator Severe Non-joint-related reOection Severe frequent base -related cracking cracking, and pieces of cracking, surface distortion aspltalt displaced (faulting) Poor Frequent Faulting, cracking Severe (^) Wlteelpath rutting, alligator Severe Slab e xposed and deteriorated Severe cracking, and pieces of aspltalt displaced Poor Extremely deteriorated , (^) Extremely deteriorated , Slab exposed and extremely rupture, and displacement r upture and displa ce ment deteriorated, motorist dis- frequent, and motorist frequent, and motori st comfort discomfort discomfort Poor Impassable at posted Impassable at posted speed Impassable at posted speed speed
°'Coded K in Figurt 2
A note of explanation is in order concerning evaluation of the base. Obviously, one cannot see the base or any material underlying the surface when scoring a section of highway; however, certain prob- lems manifested in the pavement surface are caused by ina deq ua t e road bed s up port (2,14, 16 ,17). The base s c al e ad dresses this t yp e of st Wc tur al problem and is helpful in estimating different costs for rehabilitation (see Uses of the Survey Data) •
Validation of Scales
Even though considerable effort was expended to en- sure consistency in condition assessment, the ques- tion always arises as to whether the scales are being
0 used properly in the field. To ensure this the following procedures were fol- lowed. To ensure internal validity (replicability of the scales themselves), the scales were redevel- oped by the same judges three months after initial development. Test-retest correlations showed excel-
lent (r > 0 .9 ) r e p r o du cibility C!ll. To ensure
historical comp a ris on s , differences among the im- proved scales developed in 1981 and those in use earlier were quantified and found to be negligible
· To ensure external validity (replicability of field scores by using the scales), a small portion of the highway system (750 miles) was surveyed twice in 1982 by different raters. Table 3 gives the re- sults: of 1,130 sections double-scored, 96 percent were scored within ±1 scale unit by both teams. The overall difference was -0.11 units (±1 per- cent) for surface and -o. 45 (±4 percent) for base. These tolerances are satisfactory and demon- strate that visual rating systems can have high con- sistency if properly designed.
DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING
NYSDOT's high~ay condition survey process is shown
in , Figure 3. The cycle begins in early spring when refinements and modifications, if necessary, are made to procedures. A training seminar is held in the main off ice. Each team receives a manual of in- structions for conducting the survey, complete with photographs and verbal scales (18). A series of films that simulate travel over highways in various conditions is shown at the training seminar. Each film is scored and then discussed, and the individ- ual scorers are then instructed on how to improve their ability to make judgments by using the visual scoring materials. Additional films of highways are then shown and convergence of scoring is reason- able. In 1983 a field test over a fixed route was included. The training lasts 1.5 days and is viewed as essential to a decentralized windshield condition scoring procedure. The survey itself is conducted by 11 two-person crews, one from each of NYSDOT's regional offices. Crew members vary in background. Some are techni- cians, engineers, and analysts; others are not tech- nically trained but perform administrative or cler- ical functions. The quality or quantity of the work produced by these teams has been consistent if all teams receive the same intensive training. The crew drives each highway section, usually at the posted speed, and uses the photographs for scoring. Field scoring sheets are given to each crew, arranged by route within county for easy driv- ing sequence. The score sheets show detailed char- acteristics and condition data for each section; sections are short pieces of road, about 0. 75 mile in length, usually with homogeneous characteristics, and built or repaired under one contract. As each section is traversed the surface and base scores are determined and placed on the score sheet and other corrections are made to field data. Experience has shown that the team need not stop or even slow down on most sections, so the work pro- ceeds rapidly. Scoring is done on all sections, not
Figure 4. Sample red flag listing.
RED FLAG LISTING
INPUT FILE: t982 SUFFICIENCY
RC co ET TRC BEGIN END PVMT SHLD t980 FEDERAL AIO GY ROUTE VOS MILEPT (^) MILEPT WDTH WDTH PR! AADT /VR SYSTEM t8 t96 Ott 00.45 00.87 28 00 2600 Bt FAUS t8 t96 Ott OO.B7 Ot. t6 20 05 2600 Bt FAUS t8 t96 Ott 01. 28 02.43 20 02 2600 Bt SECONDARY 1B t96 Ott 02.43 (^) 02.50 24 00 2600 Bt SECONDARY 18 t96 Ot1 02.50 03. 36 20 05 2600 B1 SECONDARY tB t96 Ot1 03.36 05.93 (^20 04 2600) Bt SECONDARY t8 t96 Ott 05.93 05.97 22 to 2600 Bt SECONDARY 1B 196 Ott 05.97 06.02 4B 04 2600 Bt SECONDARY tB t97 02t 00.23 00.3t 24 00 5500 Bt PRIMARY URB 1B t97 02t 00.94 01.01 tB 03 2000 Bt FAUS tB t97 02t (^) 06. t2 06.3B 20 to 3000 ·79 (^) SECONDARY 1B 254 02t 00.00 00.53 24 03 t1500 79 PRIMARY URB 1B 254 021 00.53 00.67 24 00 11500 79 PRIMARY URB tB 3t3 Ott 00.00 00.85 22 08 1400 77 SECONDARY t8 313 Ot 1 DO. BS Ot .60 22 OB t400 77 SECONDARY t8 313 Ott 01.60 04.52 22 OB t400 77 SECONDARY tB 338 Ott 01.BO 02.BB 20 03 900 B1 SECONDARY t8 33B 011 02.B8 03. 17 20 03 600 Bt SECONDARY t8 JJB Ott^ 03. 17 06.93 20 OJ 600 81 SECONDARY 1B 372 Ot1 00.00 00.24 36 00 1BOO 81 PRIMARY RUR t8 372 Ot1 (^) 00.30 00.34 26 00 1800 8t (^) PRIMARY RUR 18 372 Ot1 00.34 00.54 20 05 1BOO B1 PRIMARY ROR
TOTAL RED FLAG MILES IN COUNTY ARE:
TOT CTY MILES: 243. 11 PERCENT OF MILES IN COUNTY FLAGGED:
TOTAL RED FLAG MILES IN REGION ARE:
TOT REG Ml LES: 2035.4B PERCENT OF MILES IN REGION FLAGGED:
THIS TOTAL EXCLUDES OVERLAP MILEAGE; OVERLAP
been used by the department in determining network- level highway needs and in preparing legislative requests.
Red Flag Analysis
The red flag computer summary is provided to the regions immediately after main office processing of the survey data is completed. The red flag program- ming gives the location of highway sections that fall below a selected level of condition. Thus, it serves as an early alert on problem sections that may need attention. The select er i ter ia are determined by the user and can be changed readily to accommodate a variety of requests. (The highway condition system is stored on-line and can be quickly assessed through remote computer terminals. Each year's file is about 20, 000 records of 150 characters each.)• The red flag also computes the total mileage deficient in each county and region and the percentage of the total mileage that fails the desired criteria. Fig- ure 4 shows typical red flag output.
Specialize d Co mputer Summaries
Many specialized computer summaries are prepared in response to requests from numerous main office and regional administrators and technicians. The de- partment's general purpose computer programs allow for quick on-line access and versatile output capa- bilities. For example, condition values can be sum- marized by miles of facilities in various states of condition, by pavement type within county, or by any other variable contained on the file.
Deterioration Rates
A knowledge of deterioration rates is vital in se- lecting optimal treatment strategies for rehabili-
RED
SURFACE RUPT MAINT^ STRUCT^ V/C^ SUFF^ SECT^ ION
SCORE SCORE INDEX SCORE RATIO SCORE LENGTH
5 5 56 ,^29
5 5 5 50.^07
5 5 5 50 B
5 5 5 50 2.^57
5 5 59.^04
3 42.^ OB
5 57.^07
5 5 5 50.^53
5 5 56. t^4 5 5 53.^ BS 5 5 53.^75 5 5 53 2. 92 5 5 5 50 t^ ,^ OB 5 5 5 50.^29 4 40 3. 76 5 57.^24 4 49. 04
- 20
60.27 62.^37 B3.3B^95 ,^ t5^ 4.80^.^00 24.79% 25.66% 34.30% 39. 14% 1.97%. 00%
384.35 3BO. 20 592.2B 597 .0J 76.29 10. 26
1B.BB% tB.6B% 29. t0% 29.33% 3.75% .50%
FLAG MILES SHOWN ON LOWEST NUMBER ROUTE ONLY.
tating pavements and for projecting network deterio- ration over time. NYSOOT reviewed data from the highway condition file to obtain preliminary esti- mates of deterioration. This analysis was conducted by arranging highways according to condition score versus the number of years that have elapsed since the last contract work was performed on the pavement (the year of last contract work is included on the condition file). The results of this analysis (19) yielded preliminary network-level estimates of de- terioration by type of pavement. A research en- deavor is currently being conducted (20) to provide the data necessary for deterioration ~lysis. This study involves long-term monitoring of pavements in the Albany area to determine the effects of various rehabilitation strategies on pavement serviceability.
Highway Con d iti on Projection Model
The Highway Condition Projection Model (HCPM) is a long-range forecasting tool used to predict the long-term impact on highway condition of alternative general rehabilitation strategies. The model oper- ates by projecting the conditic;m of each highway section and the costs necessary to repair it under a given rehabilitation strategy specified by the analyst. A recent paper C.!.l describes the model.
Highway Sufficiency Ratings Publication
NYSOOT publishes the Highway Sufficiency Rating Book, a complete list of all sections and their con- dition. The publication displays comprehensive lo- cation, physical, operational, and rating measure data for each link on the state touring route sys- tem. It contains highway condition scores, includ- ing surface and base condition, maintenance index, and computed values for capacity, volume/capacity rates, and sufficiency rating. The publication
Figure 5. Sample from sufficiency rating publication.
IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS RATING MEASURES
....^ "-••,"
[OHly
. ALBANY
ALBANY ALBANY ALBANY
I
ALBANY 1 ALBANY !
ALBANY I
ALBANY ALI ANY I ALBANY
I
ALBANY llLlllNY
'
ALBANY ALBANY ALBANY ALBANY '! ALBANY ALBANY ! ALBANY j ALBANY .,. ALBANY ALBANY
ALBANY
. ALBANY ! ALBANY f ALBANY ! ALllANY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY I ALBAtlY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY ! ALBANY . 1 . ALBANY ALBANY ; ALBANY
I
ALBANY , ALBANY
I
ALBANY ALllANY j ALBANY j ALBANY i ALBANY j ALBANY
I
ALBANY ALBANY
I
511111 E !E ..^ ~!
"' ~^ l^ ~^ ..^ t^
Ml.llw1y !h•dllll ~ ~ ~
..~ =; 3 ~ " ; \ 0 ,
::i ~i~ "'"''"''
IP11gtll H ,}m .~ .~ J
:;.^ •"'^ ,':^ ~~^ "^.^ ... "- .'U-·
i
~t ·~! ... Rf'ltrtllCf!
.t~
uoI•^ i MU,.pe^ h1^1 Mtthr '~ u
l 11 l oa! 1! 00. oo i ALBANY co cm! oF ALI ANY 11 H E l 2 ~ o.i ERL ~ P J o ~ r M, Ef I I I f
111! 08 f l f OO. oc 1! BB-1 00.04 .4 12 ;4 ;5B ; 077 ; 00 ,2 ,.5 2 ;B , 80 , 23900 ; 1480 i 28IO! 0. 5
1 tt i 08 l l j OO. OI 1 88-1 oo.o5 1c 12 i4 j S8! 077 jOO 2 !5 2 \B j 80 j 23900 \ 14B0 i 2810 1 0. 5
l 11! 0l! l i 00.09 j ENO llOIJTE 20 OVERLAP 1 ; ;! ; ; i , , ;! ; ,
11 q o8 ii 100. 21 I 1 88-18 00. 12 12 12 i• i5B j 075 : oo !2 iS 2 \B j 71! 17700 i 1100 i 930 i 1. 1
1 11 108 i 1 i OO. 31! '1 88-18 00. 17 12 12 j4 j48 j 075 \ 00 !2 !S 2 \8 1 78! 17700 j 1 IOO! 930 i 1. 1
i 11 i o8 i 1 i oo. c1 i 1 88-18 oo. 11 .c <2 i c 1 cc 1 o7s !OO i2 j5 2 !8 i 78 i 7800 j 470 j 2~30 j 0. 1
i 11 j OB i q oo. 113 l ;88-111 oo. 1c i8 12 1c 180 1 oas 1 0 0 12 1s 2 18 j 7a ; 7800 i oo 1 c 100 1 o. 1
! 11 , 08! 1 1 00. 79 I! 88-18 00. 18 i UlfOlll ~ COltSTRUCT I Ott 2 18 I ;. I! 1 11 1 oa! 1 j oo.9 d 11oun: 7117I IS llVER NI CONN I i : i ' 1 •! ' 1! I :
; II ; 08 ; 1 ; 01.10 f ] 88-18 00. 3 1! U~ O ~ R i co ~ STR ~ C T o ~ 2 l8! i I j!
!, 1111 !, 00 19 f 1 1 !_ 0011 .. 2 1~ ;! B8-18 00. 08 i u~o~R j CO!fSTRl/cr to~ 2 jB! I! ~ ! tt! 08 I; 1 jo1.211 [^ a^ AOUTE 32 JUNCT~ON;^ CTYST 00.^07 ,9l .2! i,2 • j 80 .j 073 • I^00 1 :5! 0 .F! 1 l^78 '1! 0800 ,!^880 !i^4100 l!^ 0. 1
11 j OB j 1 j Ol.3 11 ICTYST 00.0!1 !4! 1 i j 54 f 073 !oo l !s o ; F! 7B I 7900! 490 '1 1310 '1 0. 3
11 ; 01 .1 101. as , j crvsr oo.51 !4 i 1 11 !14 1 482 l oo 1 :s O jF J 78 j 7900! uo 1310 o. 3
i 11 j o9! 1 i o1.aa i AOUTE 111 JUNCT ~ ON LEIT 1 1 1 : 1 I ,; : I 1 i! ·
l "! o8 1 q o2. oo i · crYST oo.1 tl c i 1 i j 54 l 487 oo i is o iF l 78 ' s100 • 9
s 30
o j_ 1 8
3 4
8 0
o ,;_• o. c
l
11 i oa i 1 102. u 1 ll crvsr oo.24 !2 !1!! 38 l c11s. oo! !s o iE J 79! 1s100! 1. 1 1 1' 08 : I ; 02. 34 , 87-18 00. 10 ; 3 " 2 ;2 ; 88 j 4S4 JOO 1 is 0 lE! 79! 15100 i 930 i 880 i 1. 0 11 , oa! t! o2. 31 j i B7-18 oo.oc jB j2 jc j ?C j c77 j oo L is o jc \ 7B j 1s1oo j uo !41oo i 0. 2 I" oa i 1 j o2. C8 j 1 87-18 oo. 08 !8 !2 i4 l 811 l 077 IOO i fs o :op 9 11s100 1 930 £37eo i 0. 2
.i1 08 11 , 02. 82 • i 87-1a oo. 111 j 11 j 2 j4 i 74 !o77 oo l !... s o !o i 79 f 1s1oo l 930 f 3890 i 0. 2
l
i 1 t! Oll! l! 02.70! llR IS UNDER : ' • 1 J I • · l! •!!
11! oa! 1 l o2. 88 j 11oun 90I IS urioER i i! 1 • • f i i • ; i 11! 01 11 1 02. 88! f87-17 oo. 34 ic h i c i11c lo77 !oo f! 11 o ;c l 8o! 39oo l 24o 1 24Bo! 0. 1 j tt j 08 iti 03. 37 j! 87-17 oo. c1! c 12 11 c • 1. s2 ' 1 · o7s 110! :,i s o !c i so i 3900! 24o j291o i o. o ; 11 101 ·,· ,,
· 03. 37 111ourt: 377 IS o ~ Ell III H c<mi; j 1 1! i! i i i j j l1 ; 08 , 1. 03. 5 1I !87-18 00. 14 !2 !2 "4 1 48 1075 00! is O !C! BO j 3900 ; 240! 930 i 0. 2 11 11 01 1 1! 03. 72 1! 81-11 oo. 21 i4 !2 !c! 80 !01s l oo! is o ie! 19 , 1s900! 910 !2•10! o. c
j tt j oa i 1 i o3. 82 j! 81-11 oo. 1o j2 f2 !s j 3o lo7s !os i !... s o je! 79! 1s9oo j 9eo i 91o j 1. 0
1 11! 08 I 1! 03. 82 , ClTY OF ALBANY! i i l l I l t : I I j i i
~^.^ ,,
;: ~
~ ?'
A;
. i
118B! 118 1 688 l!^118 ;!
778 i 73 i
778 i 73 j
888 I! 80 '!
1 l
889 ~ 888 i
::: i
889 ) 889 I 889 i 889 ' 889!
83 Ii
82 iI
I 83 '
e3 l
93 I
83 i
83!
83 j
'i '
889! 83 l
889 i 83 i
889 l 83 i
889 i 83 j
889 I 13 .!,
•••
l• j I
1~ : !.
83 83 78 79 87 80
92 82 It 92 87 88 92 92 92
92 92 92 92 91
I 11 l o8 l2! 00. oo l ro11N OF COLONI ~! i i!! '1· t! l :! i i i
· 11 · 09 · 2 • 00. 5!1 j 9 1108 2oos ; 22 oo.5s l2 11 1 l 3o l 482 .o• t !c o \E !1e j 1c4oo j 1oso j 930
! 11! 01 !2! 01.60 1 e 1108 2013 1 22 01.os 12 11 130 c92 io4 ; !4 O !E i 78! 158oo! 9&0 1 930
! 11! 08 !2 !01.11o j ROUTE 378 JUNC i ioN i l!! 1!! i ,!
l
ll j 08 i2 i 03. 04 '1 8 11011 2031 j 22 01.cc :2 f2 !5 , 24! 472 [ 04 f le O jEp 8 j 21100 j 1310! 130 11 1 08 · 1
· 2 j o3. 111 8 1101 2037 j 119 oo llS i2 12 1s , 24 1 c112 1 oc 1 !4 0 1£ • 80 119400 11200 1 770 ., tt. 08. 2 1 03. 9 1. • 11011 2040! 118 00. 22 14 12 1 11 48 47B t 00! !c 0 1,, E ll 110 l l94C0 , 1200 j lll
I. 1 988 i 83 ] 3. 48! 88
1. 0 677 i 87 13. 73 1 81
- 4 998 j 87 )4. 00 79
- 5 888 I 80 !3. 28 I 72 o. ~ 778 , 73 ,2. 1111 , 87
11! 08 !2! 03. 11 111oun: 1511 JuNCt ION l ' '! I I
I. 2 I. 2 I. 2
11 1011 12 104.31 1 1108 2occ l 119 oo. c7 1• 1 !2 !B l ca 47B !oo i c o :e l 78 32100 2340 , 11130 1 •1 1 011 j2 j oc.c1 j • 11011 2ocs! 111 00. 11 !• .2 15 c11 , c711 : 00! 1c 0 1e! 18 1 321oo j 2340 , ; , j 11 j Oll j 2 l' 04.70 J • 1101 2048 1 111 oo. 2 11 c 12 .• 411 10111 • 00 : jc o jE !7 8 l 32100. 23co j 18lo 1 11 1011 , 2 04.70 llOUTE 7 D\IER ; I I I ii : i i... I
. 11 , oe '1 2 ·
o5. o8 • 1101 2os1 I 119 oo. 38 i• l2 !5 j •a 075 !oo i ic o JE l 78 l 21700! 1sao 1 1113o l o. a 11 j o8. 2. 05. ll!I t 11011 2os1 i 119 oo. 57 !4 f2 j5 1ca j c111! 00 1 :c o iE i 7a j 21100! 11180! 1113o l o. a
I!!! ~: l ~ l : : : li llO,~TE 1~~11 ·~:mo:555 oo. c1 !c 2 l5 411 1 47!1 foo f I. cc o !e! 11! 21100 11780 111130 j 0. 1
! 11 1 011! 2 ]l oa. 59 1 • 11011 2085! !1555 oo. n ic 2 ]s ; c11 1 ccs 1 1o l ·• 1 ; o jE! 79 } 21100 : 1190 1 203o j o. a
i I i! I l i! i i : i! i I i
77 • i; 7B 1 ;J.^11 II 77
777 1 70 '3. 38 74 887 j 83 1 l 71 887 ~ 83 b. 11 ,. 82 88 7 I 83 j3. &I 82 E 1 i 777 ; 70 ••. 27 ; 15
778! 111 13. 85 I ac
1 ' i
presents link data contiguously by route within county and is used as a handy reference for highway information both within and outside the department. A typical page from the sufficiency ratings is shown in Figure 5.
cost less than in previous years because of improve- ments in scoring and processing procedures.) Decentralization of data collection is the key to • rapidity in data turnaround time. A strong training and validation effort ensures accuracy and consis- tency. The results of the survey can be used with confidence to determine network-level condition, to estimate network deterioration rates, to est i mate overall costs to rehabilitate the system, and to forecast long-range implications of various rehabil- itation strategies.
CONCLUSIONS
A pavement management system is a valuable process used to optimize investments in the highway infra- structure. Current, reliable, and easily accessible condition data are essential to pavement management activity. Procedures being developed by NYSOOT to improve its existing windshield condition survey procedure are described in this paper. The survey, conducted annually by scoring teams from the depart- ment's 11 regional offices, involves the use of vis- ual scales based on photographs. Intricate measure- ments are not required: therefore, data can be collected, processed, and summarized in a short pe- riod of time at relatively low cost to the agency. In 1982 the entire process from data collection through summarization took about 5 months and cost approximately $75,000. (This cost was not a new cost to the agency because a condition survey has historically been conducted. The effort actually
The most important use of the data is to red flag candidate highway sections that require more de- tailed engineering evaluation. The windshield sur- vey data are used by this agency as a screening process to identify highway sections that are candi- dates for rehabilitation and require further analy- sis. Detailed engineering analysis can then be con- ducted in the regional offices, generally by design personnel. Decisions on the best treatment strategy for the candidate section can then be developed. Because it can serve as both a screening device for project selection and as input to network needs, the windshield survey is an important part of New York State's pavement management process.
